Deeper

Part five

This week I’m going to discuss a popular phrase used in social media comment sections. This one, again, is not a dog whistle so much as a co-opted term that causes some confusion and is used to derail or shut down discussions of social issues. You may have encountered the term while engaging in a back and forth in discussion forums when issues of women’s rights, racial inequality or any other current affair topics. You make a comment stating your agreement that there should be some sort of change because there is inequity and you are accused of virtue signaling. Mic drop. You’re completely dismissed. Nothing you can communicate now can ever again be considered honest and truthful. You have been accused of jumping on a bandwagon without sincerely believing in your own words. You are engaging in fake outrage you cad!

Unlike many dog whistles, this term was born from a reasonable concern. Journalist James Bartholomew used it back in 2004 to criticize people that loosely dabble in activism by giving lip service without engaging in any meaningful form of behaviour. A reasonably current example of the original definition of virtue signaling would be Black Out Tuesday where people updated profile pictures with an all black image to show solidarity with BLM. The act can be criticized for making a minimal effort to score maximum social activism points without actually engaging in anything else to help the cause. Bartholomew called on people to do more than easy acts that required little to no effort. He called for engagement. His criticism was reasonable. Simply stated, don’t just vote for a progressive party every few years or passively support a cause, actually take some time and do something to create change. So, what happened?

The evolution of the term is difficult to pin down but it seems to have found its way to popular online forums a few years ago. At this time it is used appropriately to call out lackluster lip service to profound social issues and as a way to implicate someone with being disingenuous and attack their true feelings about the social issue. Unfortunately the dilution of “virtue signalling” has resulted in it most commonly being used as a deflection from earnest discussions. Accusers will also attempt to implicate their subjects of hidden agendas for supporting causes. Someone showing support for International Women’s day may be accused of virtue signalling to gain the trust of women they seek to have coitous with while they may have a history of actively advocating for real equality for all genders. Why does this matter?

Virtue Signalling is quickly becoming a term of derision beyond its original intention. Instead of being used as a call for real activism it is more often used as a way to dismiss opinions or factual information. In its original form the term challenged the target to do more, encouraged the person to step off the sidelines and become actively involved. More often today, the accusation is meant to stop all discussion and simply tell the target that their advocacy is a sham and that they should stop. Just stop. The distinction between Bartholomew’s original definition and the more common definition today seems very close until the intended outcome is considered. Bartholomew wanted people to be pushed to engage in meaningful work for the causes they spoke about. In social media discussions people who use the term intend to silence discussion and debate about social issues. The implication of Virtue Signalling is the same in both uses but the desired outcome are polar opposites.

What now? There are a variety of things to consider if you’re accused of Virtue Signalling. If you’re paying lip service to a cause that you have no real intention of making any effort to support then maybe go ahead and do the minimum but acknowledge that your minimal effort affords you no real social capital. If you are being an ally and spending time understanding and advocating for a cause you believe in then ask yourself, should I do more? The answer might be that you can or that you can’t, it’s up to you but feel secure that your words and beliefs are aligned. If you are taking part in a popular social cause only to gain points with potential romantic interests, then you’re engaging in a behaviour that people have engaged in since the beginning of time. Does it make you kind of greasy? Yeah it really does. Maybe life a more genuine life and put your efforts into something you believe in and find a more truthful relationship. Or don’t, this is not a cause I care much about.